Special Report: the Moving Forces Behind Motorcycle Legislation
Special Report: The Moving Forces Behind Motorcycle Legislation
LEGISLATION FORUM
J. BRADLEY FLIPPIN
THIS is the second article of a series dealing with governmental organizations influential in formulating motorcycle legislation.
NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC LAWS AND ORDINANCES
This is a completely independent, nonprofit organization which, for the last one and one-half years, has been under the leadership of Edward F. Kearney, the current executive director. Prior to this period, he served four years as a research specialist with the National Committee. He is an attorney, a graduate of Georgetown Law School. Prior to that, he obtained a B.S. from Union College in Schenectady, N.Y. Kearney, like the others, is not a stranger to motorcycles. He rode a 1948 vintage machine during 1952-53.
The National Committee obtains its operating funds from the sale of publica tions, the Federal Highway Administra tion, and seven private organizations, including the Automotive Safety Foun dation, the Insurance Institute for High way Safety, the American Automobile Association, the National Safety Council and the MS&ATA.
"The responsibility of the National Committee," Kearney indicated, "is to provide motor vehicle and traffic laws that are meaningful in promoting safe and efficient use of the highways. It is limited to areas where there is general consensus of feeling or agreement that the laws of the various states should be approximately the same on the same point.
"The National Committee is respon sible for and publishes the Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC). The UVC is a guide for motor vehicle and traffic laws, but it must be adopted by each state, or by the District of Columbia, before it becomes effective.
(Continued on page 32)
Continued from page 30
“The UVC is a move toward standardization of traffic laws. For example, the meaning of a red light, an amber light, or a stop sign should be the same from state to state. The National Committee, through the UVC and other documents, including our Model Traffic Ordinance, has been working closely with state, federal, and local agencies, and interested private organizations and individuals for 42 years.”
How does the motorcycle fit in with the other work y ou are doing?
“It’s right in the main stream because laws and ordinances affect all users of highways. The overriding consideration of the National Committee is to provide for the safest, most efficient use of available highways in each state by the drivers of all types of vehicles. Whenever a member of the National Committee votes upon a law for adoption by 50 states and the District of Columbia, he takes motorcycles into account.
“The National Committee first became aware of the motorcyclist’s problems back in 1923-26, when people first started riding [in large numbers]. For instance, the Committee knew two headlights wouldn’t fit or even work on a motorcycle. Some special drafting considerations have to be taken into account to make certain that no unnecessary or unreasonable hardships are imposed upon the operator or owner of a motorcycle or any other two-wheeled vehicle, including bicycles.”
What is the National Committee doing for the motorcyclist today?
“I would say, in general terms, that we are attempting to provide laws, rules and regulations that are reasonable and that acknowledge his privilege, equal to all other users of the highway, to enjoy safe and unimpeded use of the roads and highways of this country.”
Is driving a right or a privilege?
“First, there are constitutional restrictions against taking away people’s rights without providing due process in the form of administrative hearings and appeals. The UVC, for instance, states that before a person’s license can be taken away (even from the very early days), there is to be a hearing, afterward, but nonetheless, a hearing.
“However, when a driver is convicted of certain serious offenses, such as driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor, the UVC always has provided that his license be revoked. No hearing, no appeal, just plain revoked for a period of one year.
“If the accepted theory were that driving is a right, and not a privilege, then a person’s license probably could not be revoked until after a review of his case by an administrative or judicial official. In other words, if driving is definitely a right, it is a little more difficult for authorities to impose restrictions which are deemed reasonable and necessary to protect all users of the highway.”
(continued on page 35)
Continued from page 32
What is the biggest problem the motorcyclist faces today?
“I think it’s one that the motorcycle driver shares with all other drivers— change. All drivers today, and in the future, are going to be subjected to a number of changes that are necessary to expedite traffic and provide for safety on the highways.
“For example: There are three rules in this country today as to exactly what a yellow light after a green light means. In some states, the yellow after a green means stop. In other states, you may go into the intersection on yellow, but you must clear it before the red light comes on. In the remaining states, it doesn’t mean anything other than to serve as a warning that a red light is coming. Why has this come about? Essentially, traffic engineers have provided for a longer yellow interval. Yellow used to be very short. Now the yellow light stays on for awhile, and it’s reasonable and s^fe for drivers to proceed and use the intersection even though the light is yellow.
“Several of the UVC’s provisions over the years have followed concepts first developed in California. Right turn on a red light, for instance, is one we just added to the code in 1968. At the present, a person who has driven in Massachusetts is not used to making a right turn on a red light, nor is he used to a number of other rules California has, which Massachusetts doesn’t. This calls for re-education. Perhaps he’ll note all of these changes when he gets his California driver’s license, maybe not.
What are your views on the action of some states and agencies to prohibit larger motorcycles from using controlled access h igh ways ?
“The important ingredient to recognize is that vehicles on a controlled access roadway move at high rates of speed, that any vehicle which can’t maintain the minimum speed, if any has been established, shouldn’t be on it. Now this covers a lot. It covers the horse-drawn vehicle, the pedestrian, the bicycle, and the bicycle with motor attached. If there are certain kinds of vehicles that shouldn’t be operated on that highway, it is in the interest of the motorcyclist, as well as the driver, not to have that traffic there.
“The UVC, and the laws of most states patterned after it before 1968, authorized the state highway commissions to exclude motor-driven cycles from controlled access highways. What is a motordriven cycle? It’s any motorcycle up to 5 bhp, or a bicycle with motor attached.
(Continued on page 36)
U U~U U U •~UVU Continued from page 35
“We had a problem with that section (Section 11-313 of the UVC). There was a very serious accident in Tennessee involving a tractor-trailer and a farm tractor, and the UVC wasn’t broad enough to cover the farm tractor. We included motor-driven cycles, pedestrians, funeral processions, but not all types of slow moving motor vehicles. In July 1968 the National Committee revised the section and allowed the state highway commissioner or local authority to regulate or prohibit the use of controlled access roadways by any class of traffic found to be incompatible with the normal safe movement of traffic.
“Personally, I think that being able to attain and maintain a specific speed is the most important criterion. I do not know of any interstate highway where all motorcycles are excluded. Some of the smaller bikes, yes.”
Where should the dividing line be drawn between motor-driven cycles and motorcycles?
“We have a 5-bhp requirement and it is a subject of some discussion. There are several people that aren’t happy with the UVC distinction, even though it is the one generally applied on the restriction against the use of controlled access highways. Most states specify either 5 bhp or a straight 5 hp. I believe 5 hp is the more common. California, frankly, got itself in a box by going up to 15 bhp. It’s apparently too high. I think they would have been better off to stay with the UVC.
“I know the MS&ATA has suggested a performance of 60 mph with a 200-lb. man on the machine. This is a difficult standard, too. Actually, I think the ideal solution, the one that would be the fairest to the motorcyclist and fairest to the police officer, and most accurate from the point of view of a highway commission that must establish the prohibition, would be to agree on a number of cubic centimeters (cc) or other rating that would be stamped right on the engine. It would be helpful for equipment purposes, helpful for registration purposes, and would be helpful in determining the dividing line.
“I think we need a definite standard but a satisfactory one has not yet been proposed. It’s a matter of discussion and concern to everybody, and I hope soon we’ll have one.”
There has been much controversy over the compulsory helmet laws. What are your views?
“From a constitutional viewpoint, the laws are constitutional and will be upheld, the Michigan decision to the contrary. In Rhode Island, a decision has upheld the requirement and I think when it gets to the higher courts, it will be. I think if the issue ever gets to the Supreme Court of the United States, it will be upheld.
(Continued on page 40)
Continued from page 36
“Wearing a helmet is a very inconvenient thing. I personally wouldn’t mind wearing one, and if I had a machine again, now that I know what I do about the dangers involved, I would wear it. What do you do with it, though, when you are not riding? You almost have to carry it with you if you go shopping. And what do you do when you have a friend who wants to go along and ride? It would be bad enough in a passenger car, where you have someplace to leave it. I can understand and sympathize.
“Believe me, the National Committee would not have favored this requirement had not the evidence been so preponderantly in favor of using helmets. The National Committee has, historically, been very reluctant to impose requirements on people that would, in effect, say you have to go out and buy something.
What do you feel is the motorcyclist’s most effective weapon against overrestrictive or unfair regulations?
“Concerning laws and ordinances that the individual motorcyclist feels are unreasonable, he should contact the National Committee, the NHSB or, on a more immediate level, the legislators and administrators of the state concerned, indicating what he believes is wrong and how it should be changed. Letters should be complete; that is, they should indicate what the problem is, what is unfair and how it should be corrected. I have some outstanding letters from motorcyclists who were treated unfairly or who suggest good changes in laws. One particular state hadn’t changed its laws in a long, long time. The motorcyclist was right. The state was wrong. It’s our mutual job—that motorcyclist, that motorcycle club and I—to convince that particular state that it should make the change. With their help and the help of all other concerned users of the highways, I think we can.”
Do you favor special motorcycle drivers’ licenses?
“It appears to be the consensus of most state officials that some special qualifications are necessary for driving a motorcycle and it will be up to them to decide. What the National Committee, however, is vigorously opposed to is a system in which a separate license card is required. In other words, you’d have one card to drive a passenger car and a completely different card for motorcycles. If I’m qualified to drive tractortrailers, buses, passenger cars, and motorcycles, it should be so stated on one certificate.” [O]
